3 ms·

Please don't nitpick, I'm perfectly aware that the OS vendors would be the ones to recompile everything and users the ones to update their systems. I don't agr

Please don't nitpick, I'm perfectly aware that the OS vendors would be the ones to recompile everything and users the ones to update their systems. I don't agree with your sentiment as I read it as a little bit narrow-minded and I also consider the examples given to be bad, with design choices not quite feasible to be applied to generic and widespread community language such as C++. > On windows apps ship the c++ runtime along with them so nothing changes for old apps That combination is probably the worst from the both worlds so not exactly a shiny example. > MacOS users are used to compatibility breaking every 3/4 years Apple has always been special and I wouldn't consider their choices, which are almost exclusively aligned with what their business wants to achieve, to be something to be followed. They can do whatever they want because they're under total control of almost everything on their platform. Unless when they aren't and when they start to develop their own programming languages. Pretty much the same story as with Google.

jcelerier 4y ago
Which users are you even talking about then? If you don't take into account Windows and macOS you remove 99.9% of the people which are going to be impacted by this (and I say this as a full-time linux user for a decade). > That combination is probably the worst from the both worlds so not exactly a shiny example. I really disagree, Windows's model of shipping DLLs along the app is the only one that works and does not cause headaches for the end-users who want to run their software from 15 years ago (e.g., me, my parents, my non-technical neighbours, etc) ; this is the only thing that matters, the end-user experience.
- menaerus 4y ago
  > If you don't take into account Windows and macOS you remove 99.9% of the people which are going to be impacted by this (and I say this as a full-time linux user for a decade). How about server-side code powering virtually any service that we're using? I think that your 99.9% would quickly become 0.01%. Desktop is important but irrelevant in this regard. > I really disagree, I beg to differ. I think it's really terrible for reasons I have no time to dig in through right now. Many of them are in fact quite obvious.
  - jcelerier 4y ago
    > How about server-side code powering virtually any service that we're using? I think that your 99.9% would quickly become 0.01%. Desktop is important but irrelevant in this regard. the huge huge huge majority of the software I use for doing, like, useful stuff, are offline. Internet could loose all interactive features tomorrow and be restricted to just displaying fixed hand-written HTML pages like it's 1993 and my day-to-day activities on my computer would not meaningfully change - making music with the software I develop, editing photos in Krita and Darktable, writing papers in TeXStudio, the occasionnal 3D / CAD project with Blender / KiCad / LinuxCNC, etc etc

jcelerier 4y ago

Which users are you even talking about then? If you don't take into account Windows and macOS you remove 99.9% of the people which are going to be impacted by this (and I say this as a full-time linux user for a decade). > That combination is probably the worst from the both worlds so not exactly a shiny example. I really disagree, Windows's model of shipping DLLs along the app is the only one that works and does not cause headaches for the end-users who want to run their software from 15 years ago (e.g., me, my parents, my non-technical neighbours, etc) ; this is the only thing that matters, the end-user experience.

menaerus 4y ago
> If you don't take into account Windows and macOS you remove 99.9% of the people which are going to be impacted by this (and I say this as a full-time linux user for a decade). How about server-side code powering virtually any service that we're using? I think that your 99.9% would quickly become 0.01%. Desktop is important but irrelevant in this regard. > I really disagree, I beg to differ. I think it's really terrible for reasons I have no time to dig in through right now. Many of them are in fact quite obvious.
- jcelerier 4y ago
  > How about server-side code powering virtually any service that we're using? I think that your 99.9% would quickly become 0.01%. Desktop is important but irrelevant in this regard. the huge huge huge majority of the software I use for doing, like, useful stuff, are offline. Internet could loose all interactive features tomorrow and be restricted to just displaying fixed hand-written HTML pages like it's 1993 and my day-to-day activities on my computer would not meaningfully change - making music with the software I develop, editing photos in Krita and Darktable, writing papers in TeXStudio, the occasionnal 3D / CAD project with Blender / KiCad / LinuxCNC, etc etc